For many Islamabad High Court’s (IHC) verdict on Punjab Governor Salmaan Taseer’s murderer Mumtaz Qadri’s appeal against his conviction may not be very surprising. In fact many have already predicted what’s being cooked between the court and government counsels. Obviously IHC was not in a position to give a green-chit to a self-confessed murderer. But there was something in the air that a way forward would be found to save him from gallows. Though IHC has upheld Qadri’s conviction under penal code-302, it has removed the Anti-Terrorism Act (ACT) clauses, making the governor’s murder in broad daylight by his own guard not an act of terrorism, just a conflict between two feuding persons. This has now opened the doors for retrial, dragging the case for decades, pressurising the governor’s family to accept blood money, and finally for the murderer to walk free.
The court built the case to remove ATC clauses on prosecution’s evidence and investigation officer’s report which have failed to prove that the governor’s murder was an act of terrorism. Soon after the governor’ death, the then government had to struggle to even find an imam to lead the funeral prayer for martyred Salmaan Taseer and his party leadership couldn’t attend the funeral due to security concerns. Minorities’ Affairs Minister was murdered in Islamabad for voicing on blasphemy laws. Religious extremists threatened Sherry Rehman with dire consequences for calling reforms in blasphemy laws; she was forced by her own party to withdraw a bill in the Parliament on the said law reforms. The judge who convicted Qadri in 2011 was forced to leave Pakistan for safety of his family. Rashid Rehman, a human rights activist and lawyer, was shot dead for taking up the case of a professor accused of blasphemy. Several blasphemy-accused inmates were attacked and killed on the behest of Qadri who was staying in the same Adiyala jail. Civil society members, gathered in remembrance of Taseer, were attacked and thrashed by religious extremists. Worst of all, the present government had to struggle to find a lawyer to be present during Qadri’s appeal in IHC.
I wonder how come IHC has failed to find an act of terror in the killing of a governor of most powerful province of Pakistan at a public place in presence of dozens of guards. Didn’t Qadri’s act create any sense of fear and insecurity among the public (to be on par with literal definition of terrorism)? Even after the murder, Qadri didn’t feel any remorse and declared in the court — “I have taught a lesson to all the apostates as finally they have to meet the same fate”.
If Qadri is absolved of terrorism then we should question the ongoing operation against religious/secretion extremists. They are also doing the same what Qadri did — killing people because of different beliefs/faiths. We shall support the government to appeal against abolition of ATC clauses, and provide fool proof security to lawyers to take up the appeal in Supreme Court.
In my opinion blasphemy laws, enacted by a colonial power in British India, later drastically amended by a military dictator, Ziaul Haq should be debated with open mind to find what message these convictions are delivering. As Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) is ‘Rahmat-al-Aalimeen’ — blessing and kindness for the whole universe, why are we killing people in his name? Are we not committing blasphemy by killing in the name of a prophet who was an example of whole-hearted kindness?
MASOOD KHAN
Jubail, Saudi Arabia
